Baby not given antibiotics 'until after cardiac arrest'
A baby suffering with a respiratory illness was not given prescribed antibiotics until after he suffered the first of two cardiac arrests, an inquest heard.Ben Condon, who was born prematurely, was two months old when he died at Bristol Children's Hospital in April 2015.He was being treated in the intensive care unit for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and metapneumovirus (hMPV), which are similar to the common cold in adults.University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust has previously admitted a failure to give Ben antibiotics sooner contributed to his death.
A previous inquest recorded Ben's death as being caused by ARDS, hMPV and prematurity, but this was quashed by the High Court after new evidence emerged.Ben's parents, Allyn and Jenny Condon, from Weston-super-Mare, fought hard for a second inquest which is under way at Avon Coroner's Court.The inquest heard Ben had developed a pseudomonas bacterial infection before his condition deteriorated and he died having suffered two cardiac arrests.Mr Condon previously claimed doctors "intentionally" did not disclose his son had the infection until after he was cremated.
On Thursday, a junior doctor on the unit told the court she did not return to Ben with antibiotics after another patient needed urgent attention.Dr Jessica Spaull told the inquest she could not recall a conversation with a consultant about giving Ben antibiotics, other than it would be "reasonable to start"."I recall I was in the process of doing that [writing up the prescription] when another of my allocated patients… when their endocrinal tube was accidentally removed," she said."I recall I went over to that bed in an emergency, and I recall that I was involved re-intubating that patient."That meant I had not completed that prescription at that point."She realised the prescription had not been administered while completing a handover for the evening shift."I recall looking at the drug chart and realising that the antibiotic prescribed earlier hadn't been given," she said.
Jennifer MacLeod, representing the Condon family, asked Dr Spaull whether there was a "general consensus" among doctors that Ben's respiratory illness was caused by a virus, rather than a bacterial infection.Dr Spaull said in response she did not "and still does not have the expertise to have formulated ideas about ARDS causality" because of a lack of experience in that area.Ms MacLeod asked whether there was a "level of complacency" about how poorly Ben was.Dr Spaull said the question was hard for her to answer, because at the time she was a junior doctor and was only five weeks into her first placement on a paediatric intensive care unit.The inquest continues.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
16 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Parents of 17-year-old launch High Court battle to stop teen changing gender
The parents are separately seeking a judicial review of their GP's role Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) THE parents of a 17-year-old have launched a High Court bid to block their child from changing gender. They took the highly unusual move after the child forged their mother's signature to get hormone replacement therapy on the NHS. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up The teen was born a boy but identifies as a girl and is being backed in court by their GP. The parents insist the child lacks the mental capacity to consent to the treatment. In court papers they say no proper assessment of the teen's mental and physical health has been done. They also fear grave psychiatric harm if the child is allowed to continue with 'an inappropriate, negligently given, life-altering treatment'. READ MORE ON TRANS RIGHTS VANDAL PROBE Police hunt for trans-rights activists who defaced statue of suffragist The case is believed to be the first of its kind. The parents are separately seeking a judicial review of the GP's role in prescribing HRT. The Royal College of GPs previously stated medics should not prescribe gender-affirming hormones to patients under the age of 18. The child, who lives with their parents, started HRT last October, ahead of a referral to specialist gender services. London's High Court was told treatment began four weeks after the child forged their mum's signature on a self-assessment form. Keir says 'woman is an adult female' & insists he's 'pleased' by court trans ruling after years of woke dithering Mr Justice MacDonald said the child 'emphasises the law gives her permission to make her own decision'. The court heard the child, described as 'eloquent, articulate, and sensible' instructed a solicitor and is happy and doing A-levels. The child told the court: 'I live in two opposite worlds — one in my household, where I am seen as less than, and the other outside the home where I am calm and grounded.' Case adjourned until a later date.
The Sun
16 hours ago
- The Sun
Parents of 17-year-old launch High Court battle to stop teen changing gender
THE parents of a 17-year-old have launched a High Court bid to block their child from changing gender. They took the highly unusual move after the child forged their mother's signature to get hormone replacement therapy on the NHS. The teen was born a boy but identifies as a girl and is being backed in court by their GP. The parents insist the child lacks the mental capacity to consent to the treatment. In court papers they say no proper assessment of the teen's mental and physical health has been done. They also fear grave psychiatric harm if the child is allowed to continue with 'an inappropriate, negligently given, life-altering treatment'. The case is believed to be the first of its kind. The parents are separately seeking a judicial review of the GP's role in prescribing HRT. The Royal College of GPs previously stated medics should not prescribe gender-affirming hormones to patients under the age of 18. The child, who lives with their parents, started HRT last October, ahead of a referral to specialist gender services. London's High Court was told treatment began four weeks after the child forged their mum's signature on a self-assessment form. Keir says 'woman is an adult female' & insists he's 'pleased' by court trans ruling after years of woke dithering Mr Justice MacDonald said the child 'emphasises the law gives her permission to make her own decision'. The court heard the child, described as 'eloquent, articulate, and sensible' instructed a solicitor and is happy and doing A-levels. The child told the court: 'I live in two opposite worlds — one in my household, where I am seen as less than, and the other outside the home where I am calm and grounded.' Case adjourned until a later date. 1
BreakingNews.ie
3 days ago
- BreakingNews.ie
HSE must specify when services will be provided to children with disabilities, Supreme Court says
The Supreme Court has delivered an important judgment concerning the obligations of the HSE towards children with disabilities, including a need to specify when services will be provided to them. Compliance by the HSE with its obligations under the Disability Act 2005 involves setting out and implementing 'measurable' actions, the court said. Advertisement Although there is 'nothing objectionable' about the HSE's Individual Family Support Plan (IFSP) model for delivering services to children with disabilities, the court said the HSE must ensure it complies with its obligations and with the legislature's intention to give 'enforceable rights' to individuals. The five-judge court on Wednesday rejected the HSE's appeal against the High Court's finding that it failed to comply with its legal obligations in relation to an eight-year-old girl assessed as having autism spectrum disorder and global developmental delay. Giving the judgment, Ms Justice Iseult O'Malley said the statutory process obliges the HSE to specify what services will be provided to children with disabilities and when they will be provided. Delays in assessments of need are a 'recurring' theme in cases before the courts, she noted. There was a delay of more than 18 months in assessing the girl and further delays in providing her with therapy services identified as being her health needs. Advertisement The High Court, in finding the statutory requirements were not complied with, said the only service for the girl where the HSE specified a time frame for delivery was the development of an IFSP, but that was not a 'clinical service'. The core issues in the HSE's appeal were whether the 2005 Act required that each health service identified in an assessment report should be specified in a service statement; and whether the statutory requirements regarding the content of service statements were breached by identifying the development of the IFSP as a 'specified' health service. Ms Justice O'Malley found, while not every service recommended in an assessment report must be included in the service statement, there must be 'a rational connection' between the content of both. On the second issue, she ruled an IFSP is a 'health service' within the meaning of section seven of the 2005 Act. Advertisement She said the commencement of an IFSP is the starting point for delivery of services and the plan continues as the evolving basis for development of further goals. The legislature had intended a process through which particular services and dates would be 'clearly identified' in the service statements, with a legal right to seek implementation through the courts if necessary. If each service statement only specifies a start date for the IFSP process, the right may appear reduced as the only complaint apparently possible would be the failure to commence that process, she said. The HSE can, within the IFSP model, comply with its obligations to set out and implement measurable actions, she said. Advertisement The first service statement should 'spell out' what will be involved in the IFSP process. Reviews of the service statement also required greater detail, including an overall assessment of the goals set out, whether those have been achieved, identification of overall goals for the near future and the work to achieve those, the judge said. That might mean 'relatively frequent' reviews. If the only service specified in the first service statement is an IFSP, the HSE should record that the needs specified in the assessment of need have not been included. This was necessary under the HSE's obligation to assist in measuring aggregate needs. In the case of the girl, represented by Derek Shortall SC and Colin Smith SC, instructed by solicitor Wendy Lyon, she said the original service statement and the first review statement did not meet these criteria. The original statement had been superseded and it seemed likely there would have been further reviews, she noted.
